complaint·May 17, 2023

Additional interviews conducted did not reveal corroborated statements indicating staff are purposely listen in on or disrupting private calls. As result, the preponderance of evidence standard is not met, and this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Allegation #2: Staff does not ensure resident has a comfortable mattress. LPA conducted interviews and facility observations as stated above. LPA also reviewed a receipt of items purchased submitted by Administrator. Based on interviews and record reviews, it was revealed that resident1 (R1) was admitted to facility on 4-12-23, prior to admission, R1’s previous skilled nursing facility ordered a mattress which was delivered, yet not utilized due to R1’s request. Prior to admission, based on interviews, it was further revealed that facility staff attempted to process a physician’s order for a gel mattress which was on back order. Receipt of purchased items indicated facility purchased a 3-inch mattress topper to be place on R1’s current mattress to aid in R1’s comfort. LPA observed ordered mattress at facility awaiting pick up by delivery company. As result, it is revealed that facility made attempts to assist R1 with comfort in relation to mattress. The preponderance of evidence standard is not met to indicate facility did not ensure a comfortable mattress; therefore, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Allegation #3: Staff do not ensure resident’s dietary restrictions are followed. Allegation states R1 was given onions and garlic in meals served on 4-15-23 and 4-16-23 as well as oranges and bananas. LPA reviewed dietary notes, physician’s report, individualized service plan, and menu as stated above. LPA also conducted interviews as stated above. Based on records reviewed, it was revealed that onions, garlic, and squash were among the food items R1 was not to receive. It was further revealed that dietary had in possession dietary notes indicating restriction for R1. Based on interviews conducted it was revealed that dietary staff are aware of restrictions and utilize a procedure to ensure residents in care receive food items per requests and established restrictions which includes resident names labeled on trays to ensure accurate delivery of meals. A review of facility’s menu did not indicate food items containing onions or garlic were served on the dates specified above. Interviews conducted did not indicate corroborated statements of staff not following residents’ dietary restrictions or requests. As a result, there is not a preponderance of evidence to conclude facility staff is not making efforts to ensure R1’s or other resident dietary restrictions are followed. Therefore, this allegation is UNSUBSTANTIATED. An exit interview was conducted with Mark Baddas and a copy of this report was provided to Mark. Appeal rights provided. An exit interview was conducted with Mark Baddas and a copy of this report was provided to Mark